Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Latest Breaking News
In reply to the discussion: UPDATE: U.S. unemployment fell to 3.6 percent, lowest since 1969 [View all]BumRushDaShow
(138,236 posts)14. TGIF and glad you made it in this morning!
Their "breaking news" headlines crack me up with the length and then they eventually shorten them for the full articles. You would think it would be the reverse.
And was looking for and found this -
The change in total nonfarm payroll employment for February was revised up from +33,000 to +56,000, and the change for March was revised down from +196,000 to +189,000. With these revisions, employment gains in February and March combined were 16,000 more than previously reported. (Monthly revisions result from additional reports received from businesses and government agencies since the last published estimates and from the recalculation of seasonal factors.) After revisions, job gains have averaged 169,000 per month over the last 3 months.
So the February numbers, although revised upwards, they were still pretty low. I think there has been quite a bit of reorganization going on in various sectors and it may take awhile for those affected to actually get back to where they were (I know I have a relative caught up in that).
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
65 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
UPDATE: U.S. unemployment fell to 3.6 percent, lowest since 1969 [View all]
BumRushDaShow
May 2019
OP
About 76 of those months were during & due to Obama's terms & economic recovery. . . . nt
Bernardo de La Paz
May 2019
#1
at this point, no data is beleivable that comes out of the trump admin, if the job market is SO
beachbum bob
May 2019
#3
"If all you look at is the headline U3 figure, that could be true." But that's what gets reported
Yavin4
May 2019
#34
"Employment, as defined by the BLS, does not have the same meaning as it once did."
progree
May 2019
#37
And that stat, the U6 figure at the link, is at 7.3% which does not get reported in the media.
Yavin4
May 2019
#50
since only the top .1% are reaping rewards, seem like 2020 should be a cakewalk IF
beachbum bob
May 2019
#7
Doncha know they vote for tRump cause gubmnt the only thing keeping em from being millionaires. . nt
Bernardo de La Paz
May 2019
#8
Yes, I agree! I think they are cookin' the books! Can't believe ANYTHING that comes out of Trump's..
machoneman
May 2019
#20
Good morning. The WaPo did that with their headline about the GDP last Friday too.
mahatmakanejeeves
May 2019
#11
Just watch! These great numbers will be reduced next month, proving they are cookin'....
machoneman
May 2019
#21
Love how these figures are legit and a perfect representation of the labor market.
rogue emissary
May 2019
#22
The numbers are what they are. We use the same stats for every president. Thats the way it is.
oldsoftie
May 2019
#23
19 Do not take revenge, my dear friends, but leave room for God's wrath, for it is written: "It ...
marble falls
May 2019
#55
Lots of aberrant stastistics of the month: Employed: -103,000; Labor force: -490,000
progree
May 2019
#30
They call a randomly selected 60,000 households each month and ask a bunch of questions
progree
May 2019
#45
The unemployment rate, LFPR, etc. is based on everyone 16 and over, even centenarians
progree
May 2019
#61
Just that reply tweet and its graphic in the first one you posted was spot on
BumRushDaShow
May 2019
#40
Some news agency needs to list what jobs they count and do not count... full and part-time, double
NotHardly
May 2019
#48
Am I the only who looks more to types of jobs as opposed to numbers?
JustFiveMoreMinutes
May 2019
#54